Why do you feel the need to include the title "soldier"? That is meaningless, the fact that he was a soldier has nothing to do with this murder. Moreover, yes he may have suffered a traumatic experience, but that has not been proven to be linked to the murder. So it is silly to speculate that the two incidents were related. Until that happens, he should be treated as a murderer, but still have a full psychiatric test to find out whether the two incidences are related. It is meaningless at this point in time to make everyone aware he is a soldier, his job is not a factor at all.

(Original post by the mezzil)
Why do you feel the need to include the title "soldier"? That is meaningless, the fact that he was a soldier has nothing to do with this murder.

That's the first thought that popped into my mind. However, the media these days tends to use words that are a bit iffy..."Soldier", "Muslim", "Romanian". I don't get what's so wrong with the word(s) 'man', 'woman'...etc.

(Original post by the mezzil)
Why do you feel the need to include the title "soldier"? That is meaningless, the fact that he was a soldier has nothing to do with this murder. Moreover, yes he may have suffered a traumatic experience, but that has not been proven to be linked to the murder. So it is silly to speculate that the two incidents were related. Until that happens, he should be treated as a murderer, but still have a full psychiatric test to find out whether the two incidences are related. It is meaningless at this point in time to make everyone aware he is a soldier, his job is not a factor at all.

Just because it has not been factually proven at this time that his actions were linked to his traumatic experience, that does not mean we should be banned from mentioning it or discussing the possibility.

(Original post by ismailjan3)
That's the first thought that popped into my mind. However, the media these days tends to use words that are a bit iffy..."Soldier", "Muslim", "Romanian". I don't get what's so wrong with the word(s) 'man', 'woman'...etc.

It baffles me completely that the media feel the need to include the individuals race, colour, religion and occupation. That is not news or in anyway related to the story?

The media should use names, and names only unless a individuals race, colour, religion, occupation etc etc is directly related to part of the story. In most cases it is not.

(Original post by thunder_chunky)
Terrible, clearly the incident by which he was injured effected him deeply. It doesn't go away as soon as the tour is over. Not that such a thing excuses what he did before anyone suggests that.

(Original post by tibbles209)
Just because it has not been factually proven at this time that his actions were linked to his traumatic experience, that does not mean we should be banned from mentioning it or discussing the possibility.

Yes we should discuss the possibility, please do not misunderstand what I am saying, but that is not what a newspaper is for. A newspaper is supposed to give the facts of the story that is already known. Unless he has been diagnosed with PTSD the fact that he is a soldier is irrelevant. Newspapers such as the Daily Mail are despicable in this way, as you are probably aware; they give the public unfounded stereotypes.

Why was the fact that this individual is an atheist not mentioned? What about his colour? They are equally important when doing stories on a muslim, no?

(Original post by College_Dropout)
Is he one of those "hero" soldiers?

No. There is nothing remotely heroic about soldiering. What is heroic is the way in which a soldier carries out his duty, and what actions he takes. For example lying down on a grenade to save another's life, or retrieving an injured comrade under effective enemy fire is heroic.

(Original post by the mezzil)
No. There is nothing remotely heroic about soldiering. What is heroic is the way in which a soldier carries out his duty, and what actions he takes. For example lying down on a grenade to save another's life, or retrieving a injured comrade under effective enemy fire is heroic.

Killing a child is not heroic.

The is nothing heroic in jumping on top of a grenade, that would be stupidity.